I have been an alumni interviewer for many years and wanted to update parents/students on changes to the process this season. Some of these are changes and some are clarifications of questions surrounding the process. This comes from a town hall with the relatively new dean of admissions Dean Soule who has been there now a few seasons.
1- Has Penn eliminated interviews? Well not exactly. To begin with the term “interview” has been removed from the vernacular. Penn no longer considers the interaction between students and alumni interviews but rather “conversations”. This is meant to eliminte anxiety students might have that is inherent in the concept of an interview. For the alumni ( now called Penn Ambassador) there is no pressure to “evaluate” the student (this is also true since the previous question rating students on a high-moderate-low scale has been eliminated from a feedback form). … hmm wonder what this all means? What is the purpose of these “conversations”? When asked this Dean Soule in a very long roundabout answer alluded to this “conversation” and its feedback as just another piece of data in the application process. Hmm seems like a big spin on terminology.
2- Is the “conversation” important? According to Dean Soule these conversations are NOT mandatory although only she and her committee know the truth as no data has been released on how many are admitted without these alumni conversations. Penn does continue to ask alumni if a “conversation” was offered and was it declined (alumni are given names and emails and need to contact students). She also alluded to the fact that applications numbers are simply so high that it is virtually (pun) impossible to offer alumni conversations to all applicants as there are not enough alumni who are willing to do this… realistically if you are offered an interview/conversation and decline it how does that look? Never seen a student admitted who declines the interview but there are probobly (?) students admitted who are never interviewed.
2- Is the interview process simply a way to engage alumni more than it is a part of the application process? Many alumni have felt this way especially if they continue to do interviews and never see any of their interviewees admitted. Well first the numbers would indicate most aalumni who talk to students will never have a student admitted no matter how glowing a review they give, unless they interview very high numbers. The typical alumni will see fewer than 10 students so the number of students they see who are actually admitted with an overall admission rate of 5-10% would maybe be one student but is usually less. The dean said they really want to engage alumni more (probobly to get more students interviewed to seem fair to all, or for other reasons (?$) as many have implied.
2- How does the Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action change things? As far as the interview/conversation it doesn’t change any thing. But now on the application there is no question addressing ethnicity etc. The dean said they are still striving to have a racially diverse community ( though denying specific quotas for specific groups - though she did say they are trying to increase opportunities for first generation students (possibly at the expense of legacy students who may have equal qualifications)). What she did say that without the answer to the ethnicity question her committee was more blinded in the process…really?
Unless applicants are simply identified by a number there are many clues to an applicants ethnicity (name, school, address, and even identifers students may write about in their essays - which she said students often try to emphasize in essays)…so the reality is the transparency of saying affirmative action no longer exists is the result of the supreme court decision, but it will continue in a more veiled manor.
2- Why are these “conversations” still virtual? After a long winded very round about answer she never came out clearly saying it’s the best way to reach the most number of students possible especially in areas where they have few interviewers. She did say it is a trend that is here to stay as least in the foreseeable future.
Summary:
1- Did Penn get rid of interviews? Yes and no. They got rid of the term interview but if you want to talk to an alumni (embassador) you can.
2- Are these talks important? - who knows. Penn says they are optional. You decide what that means
3- Are they simply trying to keep alumni engaged rather than gathering information about the student? Only admissions nows but it’s likely to have both purposes. Which is more important? who knows.
3- Supreme court and affirmative action ruling affect on the process? Nothing on the interview. But a goal for more diversification was stressed by admissions even though affimative action was overuled by supreme court and admissions committees are never going to be completely blind to all information about students’ ethnicities.